According to this book loudness matters

Yes, I think loudness, frequency and sound do matter...but other factors as well!!! And from all factors that matter your reaction to the tinnitus sound is by far the strongest contributor of your suffering.

Well said. There are other factors at play including your emotional makeup. I happen to believe that loudness, frequency do matter in the beginning. I'm still of the view that a person who needs to go into a quiet room and intentionally listen for their tinnitus does not necessarily have the same problems habituating to their tinnitus than somebody who has a whistling kettle in their head. Other factors! perhaps you could also say a persons wealth has a bearing. If you are unable to afford the cost of TRT, Neuromonics etc... then the time you take to habituate might be much longer. In the end whatever path you have taken it boils down to how or if you eventually react to your tinnitus. Our views change over time.Greg

By the way, what I wrote on therapeutic convenience which you both failed to address was taken right from the writings of Mckenna. That's right. As you no doubt know, he authors the book that Cushbart on here always tells everyone to buy, as if a psychology book could hold all the answers for all people to a problem that science doesn't even understand the origin of.

My ears were burning. Now I know why. To quote my dog, "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...."

First of all, I don't tell everyone to buy that book. Only those at TSMB having major problems with tinnitus. Second of all, I would say that because medical science doesn't hold all the answers regarding tinnitus, and has devised no cure to eradicate the signal itself, it is perfectly acceptable and even preferred that a person turn to behavioral techniques designed to make their tinnitus less of an issue in their lives.

Point the Third--through your no doubt intrepid and exhaustive research, you believe you have found a flaw with CBT in the writings of Larry "Bud" McKenna. I haven't read of this flaw myself, and I don't need to. Let's assume that you have read Lawrence correctly, he has stated something akin to CBT is not perfect or does not have all the answers, and proceed from there...

Dr. Nagler (he let me call him "Stephen" in person, great guy that he is) once told me, and has written here many a time, that "perfect is the enemy of good." I think by this he means that just because you've habituated mostly, but not completely, you should not regard this as a failure, and that you should not then give up on whatever techniques got you to "mostly" just because you did not get to completely. Or maybe I took that too far, I don't know, smn can correct me.

I think also that perfect is the enemy of good in the treatment realm. You see, it's like this Ralphie2929--CBT ain't perfect, Neuromonics ain't perfect, and from what I've read (and please, no one throw a shoe at me) TRT ain't perfect. Read enough of the literature and you will be able to poke holes and find fault with any one of these habituation therapies and the theories on which they are based. But the fact that the therapies aren't perfect does not mean they are not good, and not good enough to help you get a handle on and even overcome your tinnitus. In many cases, probably most cases, these therapies are more than good enough to get you on the right track.

So, all that said, let me ask you the following question: have you ever attempted and completed a course of habituation therapy? Because, you know, there is a book by Lawrence McKenna that contains...

Oops, there I go again.

And there is this other book called A Self-Management Guide for Ringing Ears available at the ATA website. Try that one. That book isn't perfect either. In fact, I don't think it's even being published anymore. But, I bet it's good enough to help you if you put in the time and effort.

cushbart wrote:Dr. Nagler (he let me call him "Stephen" in person, great guy that he is) once told me, and has written here many a time, that "perfect is the enemy of good." I think by this he means that just because you've habituated mostly, but not completely, you should not regard this as a failure, and that you should not then give up on whatever techniques got you to "mostly" just because you did not get to completely. Or maybe I took that too far, I don't know, smn can correct me.

He and I are willing to admit that habituation will get some people where they want to be with tinnitus, but not all people. Meanwhile smn and robx2 take the inflexible stance. They say that all can habituate, and that for those who are not, the problem is with them.Ralphie, you are trying to put words in my mouth.I didn’t say everyone habituates.I said most people do. I also didn’t say if someone doesn’t habituate the problem is with them.But their point is that it is the person's fault for not habituating to the extent they should, one way or another. They're not much different than the rich blaming the poor for their poverty. You're still trying to put words in my mouth. I haven't said anything remotely like it. they and others simply ignore the information that does not suit their views.Such as?

cushbart wrote:Dr. Nagler (he let me call him "Stephen" in person, great guy that he is) once told me, and has written here many a time, that "perfect is the enemy of good." I think by this he means that just because you've habituated mostly, but not completely, you should not regard this as a failure, and that you should not then give up on whatever techniques got you to "mostly" just because you did not get to completely. Or maybe I took that too far, I don't know, smn can correct me.

You got it exactly right, Cush, except the "great guy" part. :-)

smn

Don't worry smn, I choose my words carefully. I wrote an "A" essay in senior English about how some classic of literature (whose title escapes me, but it was by Bernard Shaw) makes it clear that a "great" man is not necessarily a "good" man.

cushbart wrote:Don't worry smn, I choose my words carefully. I wrote an "A" essay in senior English about how some classic of literature (whose title escapes me, but it was by Bernard Shaw) makes it clear that a "great" man is not necessarily a "good" man.

Phew. I feel better now. I work very hard at my image here. And if somebody thought I was a "good guy," all that effort would have gone for naught.